SOME GENERAL COMMENTS FIRST.
We fully agree that the present growth management process is not solving the problems imposed by growth in Florida, past, present and probable future. However, we regard the need as for correction of current deficiencies, rather than complete scrapping and starting over.
Re: the current regulatory process:
The current regulatory process as relates to both
the environment and growth represents a major load to the interested public.
An "environmental organization" such as ours and many others have a full
formal meeting once a month. Reducing the time between application receipt
and permit granting, at the minimum, increases the time and load on our
members. Our members who make a preliminary evaluation of applications
must review incoming applications more often, and take less time to evaluate
their impact. A critical project may require a special meeting to develop
the position of the organization, and to communicate it within the allowed
comment period. Our work load increases and the quality of decisions is
likely to suffer.
As a result of the plaints of developer interests
"Streamlining" has become a buzzword for justifying actions. We must ask
that the impact of proposals on the general and interested public be assigned
proper weight.
We must also ask that corrective steps be added
to proposals for streamlining.
Re: Sprawl control:
Ending urban sprawl is easy to say, but "Urban Sprawl"
is a concept which is easy to visualize, but which is not exactly defined,
and for which no method of measurements exist.
In a situation like this, 'ending urban sprawl'
must be regarded as "an objective in mind", i.e., something to work towards.
It is necessary to develop "physical objectives", i.e., things that are
real enough to be worked on, to be attained, or actually to see, feel or
touch. Properly done, accomplishing the list of physical objectives automatically
causes attainment of the objective in mind.
The following is a list of possible physical objectives
to end urban sprawl.
1) Modify state law to require the affected county to concur in annexations.
2) Modify state law to require 100 % absorption of all existing enclaves
in a city before annexation outside the current limits can occur.
3) Modify state law to require budgeting and financing of all services
needed by the annexation before its implementation.
4) Require Dept Of Transportation to expend 20% of all funds received
on mass transport.
5) Require DOT to upgrade all city routes to include sidewalks and
bike lanes.
6) Modify city ordinances to require 100 elimination of enclaves.
7) Modify city ordinances to require in-fill of property which satisfies
the same goal before any annexation
8) Develop measures of sprawl, such as % of empty land, population
allowed by existing zoning, change in city area, change in city boundary.
9) Change city/county ordinances to require developer to fund all added
services required.
10) Develop concepts of 3-D zoning, shops lower floor, offices next
1 or 2, apartments above.
11) Develop realistic zoning for apartments: 200 sq. ft. is an adequate
single person apartment.
12) Designate sites for theaters, branch libraries, drug stores, grocery
stores in residential areas.
13) Change tax laws and water/sewer charges to penalize distance from
city core.
14) Design cities for people, not for automobiles and buildings.
SOME SPECIFICS
TRUE COST OF DEVELOPMENT: very important, but must
be estimated for the life of the project, not just for the time of installation.
The cost should be compared to an alternate solution. Example: an annexation
involving 600 acres 1 mile from the city limits should be cost compared
to the same housing as in-fill and/or redevelopment.
FUNDING OPTIONS FOR FUTURE GROWTH: New infrastructure
should be charged to new growth, including subsidies by such work as new
roads and by too small impact fees. However, some method of funding correction
of past mistakes is also needed. In many cases, the cumulative impact of
old plus new development must be addressed.
IMPROVE ACCESS: Applications, proposals, draft bills,
etc should be posted on the Internet on receipt/generation. E-mail comments
should be allowed. Changes appearing only at a meeting should be grounds
for delay.
SLAPP SUITS: and provide penalties for interference
with citizen rights of speech, including to representatives making threats
of SLAPP.
SPECIAL MASTERS: Unless the master is well versed
in the field of the facts, the results is no better than the more formal
process.
HIGHEST PRIORITY: We must challenge the concept
that the State of Florida's highest priority is economy. The priority must
be based on ensuring high quality of life, not only for ourselves but also
for future generations. To use the words of a Small Society cartoon, we
must stop treating Florida "as if we had a spare in the trunk". The goals
must be reworded.
GREATER THAN LOCAL ISSUES: A principle of business
management is that responsibility must not be assigned where there is no
accountability (a good rule to follow when considering delegation of authority).
Current RPC structure has no accountability. When it becomes loaded with
developer interest, as is common, it fails. Some method of accountability
control is needed. It is possible that a special master should be provided.
Note that this general problem applies to many regulatory agencies, for
which calling into account is formulated to require effort and cost beyond
the capability of the general public.
LIVABLE COMMUNITIES: We must never forget that we
have assumed the role of re-molder of the earth. If we do not permanently
assure the protection of habitats and ecosystems, we too will follow the
species we have destroyed.